There ought to be a more cost-efficient way to increase this car's performance than doing an engine swap or turbo/supercharging, especially if some of us are willing to settle for moderate gains (getting the extra ten ft/lbs of torque that the base RSX has would be a good start). Any guesses as to the relative merits of modifying the air intake, exhaust mods, head polishing, etc.?
Hi Folks- This discussion has now been added to the Honda Civic Owners Club where you'll also find direct access to many other Honda Civic discussions throughout Town Hall!
For future reference, look for a direct link to the Honda Civic Owners Club in the additional Resources on the left side of the page. Happy Motoring!
What is the stock tire size going to be on the Si? I've heard that it's only 15's, but the occasional article I've seen has them listed at 17's which makes more sense. Someone want to help out?
I've only seen 15"s listed as stock, with poor tires to boot! Honda's assertion is that most consumers will swap out the tires and wheels right away, so why put anything better on.... what kind of logic is that??
[notice that Nissan, Mazda, and VW all offer better tire/wheels on their econo-sport offerings]
if that's true, than it must not have big brakes on it either. I'm not quite sure what Honda was going after here. I know there are people who like to modify their cars, but why not put some big brakes on it (that would be to big to mount 15's on) and slap on some big tires. And if the buyer doesn't want the tires, then subtract the price of the wheels from the cost of the car and take them off.
The more I think about it, the less I buy the "well they're going to change the rims anyway" argument.
Do you think they did it to boost the 0-60 times with the smaller diameter tires? Or just to keep the price of the car down? I'm interested in the Si, but to factor in the cost of a new set of rims and tires into the cost of the car starts inching it up to some nicer car's territory. Plus you can't finance the cost of the wheels into your car payment.
I think Honda is doing it b/c they feel that they can get away with it... resting on their reputation. If you think about it, Honda could equip the car with better tires and brakes for not too much money (OEMs have a lot of buyer power with their suppliers due to their volume purchases), and still make some margin on the deal.
Outside of their Type-Rs, Honda tends to skimp on both of these items. Don't they [Honda] know that other manufacturers are offering cars in this category??
I thought the first generation ITR had 15" wheels too although that is not true with the latest iteration. Smaller wheels can help reduce unsprung weight. For most people larger wheels are for cosmetic reason only. As for being able to install larger brakes, people who would do that will also remove the OEM wheel/tire combination no matter what size it came with. Even champ cars have to do away with 15" wheels. I'm pretty sure Honda will offer larger wheel as an option something they are already doing it on Civic coupes.
If Honda had to keep the price of car down, they could have saved a bundle by not using unique steering setup for the Si (regular Civics use power steering pump, not electric steering and Si is the second production car in the world to use variable gear steering system) and go as far as making moon-roof standard. There are more ways to keep price down than size of wheel.
If I'm correct, the Si is using P205/50/R15 tire size, and that means overall diameter of the wheel (including the rubber) is only 23.07"! Wheel size affects overall gearing of the drivetrain. The smaller the wheel, the shorter the gearing gets. Compared to 25.31" wheels on RSX, and assuming that the Si uses the same gearbox as the base RSX, the Civic will have 10% shorter overall gearing. This will mean that the Si engine will rev higher and faster. It may not be cosmetically appealing, but it would multiply the torque better. It is one of those compromises, style or performance. BTW, the 2002 Civic Type-R wheel size comes to about 24.61" with its 17" rim and lower profile tire.
So, does that affect 0-60 time? If it affects gearing, it is going to affect all acceleration times. So, it may not be as much as getting away with for Honda, but about what others need to do to be competitive.
Okay, the new Si doesn't have "big wheels, tires, brakes." Think of it from the perspective of Honda: you make one car that is to satisfy the Si portion of customers and the hatch portion of customers. Not everyone that buys an Si will modify it and much less hatch owners will want to because many will buy the car for the interior room and cute interior. So in order to keep alive their recent trend of watering down their cars to appeal more to the average commuter, Honda has built a car with small wheels and tires. As I have obviously not driven the car, I can't comment on the braking. However, the new Si will have shorter gearing because of overall tire diameter being relatively small. This means better acceleration. Will I buy the new Si? Nope, my EK hatch serves me just fine .
If Honda thought that Si owners would swap the 15" for aftermarket 17", why did they bother making them alloys? The cheapest wheels would have been 15" steels. The absolute final answer is: Honda will easily sell every Si so why put anything more on it that they have to. If Honda thinks that every Si owner will immediately go to their tire store to get 17" rims, they should sell the car with 4 temporary spares.
Atleast Honda still gives you IRS in a Civic. May be they should have given 17" wheels with non-independent rear suspension like VW and Nissan do. these automakers sell cars to make profit, don't they?
leads to put such wheels on the civic Si. Honda must have some research that some 70% of Si buyers chnage wheels/customize to their wish. So they have given all season tires to the rest of the crowd who might want to use Si not necessarily for extreme sport.
Alot of people will NOT get 17's. First of all, there's the unsprung weight issue, which I have no interest in talking about. Autocrossers will not get larger rims, as this is counterproductive (of course, there's the stock class bs to get through as well). I don't understand the big problem. Civics have always had crappy wheels. How many years in a row has the coupe had wheels with caps? I think that it's better that they do it this way, which is better than them adding heavy ugly wheels that you'd have to replace after paying more for them as stock items. (seminole, I don't think that any Japanese automaker would offer to reduce the price if you remove stock items - they're take it or leave with the options). Don't forget that you can use the 15's as winter rims if you plus size in the aftermarket; it would be harder if a larger sized rim were standard.
My only point was that if Honda's position is that "well most buyer's of the Si will put on their own rims" then they should have some way for you not to incur the cost of wheels you'll never use. I know it's probably a worthless thing to whine about but it seems silly to me. If that's Honda's position, you should be able to BYOW (bring your own wheels!) or have some sort of trade in before so many miles, something other than eating the cost of rims that you'll never use (according to Honda's research.)
wheels: I'm sure they will be available as option, if not as an upgrade. If I were to buy a car and wanted different wheels, I would prefer to get something after a good deal of research, not from the limited options that an automaker provides which are generally for cosmetic purpose only. From Honda, I would probably prefer to get the old ITR 15" wheels which are quite likely the lightest in business and perform exceptionally well with performance rubber. But then, it won't be 17".
IRS: Does it mean that these cars cannot handle well? I don't think the handling differences are huge. The differences may not be huge, but then, higher end cars don't come without IRS. Costs? Remember I pointed this out against your comment on cost cutting ideas, and this is definitely one of them, if only one of those hidden things.
Honda has a history of under-tiring their cars AND not offering any OEM options (look at the previous Si, or even the new RSX). I think it's sad since as an OEM, Honda could get serious discounts on wheel/tire packages. Look at the CTR they are offering overseas: nice 17" wheels-- straight from Honda!
Anyhow, this won't change anything.
So, what else are people going to cross-shop this with?
VW GTI/Focus SVT-- questionable reliability (though, I do like the GTI) Sentra SE-R -- personally, I didn't like this car when I test drove it
Others?? Automobile mag just had a comparo w/ these vehicles, and liked the SVT the best then the GTI, and then the Si (followed by the SE-R and MP3)
Haven't read the article personally, but I read somewhere that the comparo they did was part of celebration of some anniversary for Ford (100 years or something). Well, if that is true, I wouldn't be surprised to see SVT coming out on top.
But then, I would have to go out and compare these cars in person to make any kind of judgement. I still believe that Si would have more tuning potential than SVT with minimum effort, the Honda having a less stressed engine, and possibly a tranny and stock components that can take a lot more abuse.
Why would they Honda engine be "less stressed" than the SVT? The displacement is the same. I believe they're running the same compression right? You'd still have to drop the compression to slap a good turbo on it. Besides, the engine work was done mainly by Cosworth, and they're not too shabby. I don't know so much about the Tranny. It's a 6-speed Getrag unit that is also going to be used in the MINI Cooper S. I don't know what kind of torque it can handle.
Not trying to be jerk, just wonder the reasons why for your statement.
Just want to make it clear that in my above post, I'm not trying to be confrontational. Really just more curious than anything. That's one thing I hate about these boards. It's sometimes hard to tell what someone's attitude is throught their post.
Just a quick grumble about having to register at the civicsi.honda.com site to get any info. Grrr.
I love Hondas - I've had two hatchbacks and a CRX. I think I'll pass on this one, tho. It really does look like the Focus - which is fine if you're a Ford, but I'd expect more from Honda.(I'll probably go drive the thing, of course.)
Anyways, Japanese cars are so 90s. I like the Euro cars much better these days. :-) *zooms off in new VW*
I wanted to know if anyone out there has pricing on this car. I keep hearing 18-19k with side air bags being the only option.
I was also wondering if Honda dealers are putting people on waiting lists for this car and if they are requiring deposits. If they do ask for non refundable deposits and I cannot test drive it I will probably go with another car even though I have test driven an RSX which should be close to it.
My local dealer just took my number and said they'd call when they got some paperwork on incoming Si's. No mention of deposits, or MSRP -- I don't believe Honda has announced the final price. If a dealer asks me for a non-refundable deposit, I laugh and walk out the door.
I'm with diploid on that last comment. Funny how Honda is now mirroring GM in the 70s: arrogant and complacent, the public will buy our products because we're Honda, we don't have to try that hard anymore. And they're not. Just look at the 7th gen Civic. A mediocre attempt at best with build quality to match. Honda still builds the best engines and maybe they should just stick to that only. The SVT Focus will walk all over the Si in every category except possibly reliability and that might be close. How about the new '03 Hyundai Tiburon with V6 and 17" rims? When that arrives, Honda won't be able to give away its Si.
Harsh words buddy...I'm not on either side as I am perfectly content with the car I have but perhaps you should wait until the Si, SVT, and Tiburon actually debut before making such dramatic predictions.
I have heard from a guy that test drove a couple of cars before they were to be released (the new Tiburon being one of them) and he said he was very impressed with it. Since I have not driven it, I can't offer any insight either way.
Re-read the post about "arrogant and complacent". You remind me of some of the BMW salespeople I knew back in the 90's when Lexus and Infiniti appeared. They couldn't fathom people "being interested in anything from Japan". BMW is doing quite well, no doubt, but many of their old customers have abandoned them for Asian marques, and the German companies have markedly changed the design of their cars in response to the competition. "Whistling in the dark" indeed.
I own a 2000 Civic Si. It is a great car overall. I didn't and don't care to modify it, don't race it, and I use it as my daily driver. My complaints are: 1. Needs more body stiffness. This would improve the "solid" feel of the car and is what I believe causes the most creaks and squeaks. Not that the car is made of jello -- and it is way better then the 86 Accord hatchback I use to have. 2. Slow steering. 3. Needs more low end power! Notice most when starting from a dead stop going uphill. 4. Thin paint and sheet metal.
I think the alloy wheels that came with the car are fine, but the stock Michelin all season tires were crap - especially in the rain. When I replaced them with Toyo Proxes T1-S rubber (same stock size -- 199/55 R15), the car improved tremendously. These tires utilize 95% of my Si's capability. Also, I noticed that the new Si doesn't have wishbones all the way around. I don't care for mods, but I know that the wishbones provide a good combination of ride and handling. Is the setup on the new Si going to be better?
The 7 gen Si will have a stiffer chassis and will be torquier than your Si. Good move with the tires...you would be amazed what some 15x7 wheels, 205/50/15 tires, and a 22mm ITR rear sway bar would do for your car.
If I do decide to upgrade, your mods are exactly what I would do. Thought about getting the bigger rims/tires, but for now my finances convince me otherwise. However, I can't wait to see (in person) and drive the new Si!
For what it is worth, here are some ideas about what stuff to look at:
Wheels: 15x7 Kosei K1 Racing wheels (approx. 13 lbs--your stock Si wheels weigh something around 15-16 lbs) $139 each (tirerack.com)
Tires: Depends on what you need as far as treadwear and what weather you need to drive in. Kumho ECSTA are about $62 each and are a great tire for the money (with very good treadwear). I would then consider the Bridgestone RE730, higher grip $94 each or $79 each for 195/55/15. Above that, you are looking at about $120 per tire with the Bridgestone Potenza SO3 and Toyo T1-S.
Must be registered to view. It has the color, some specs and other details. One of the most interesting things is about the equipment level. I remember previous Si bashing because of absence of ABS (in USA). Now, Honda has not only added ABS, but EBD (Electronic Brake Distribution) is standard too.
The steering is electrically powered (not pump, I hope the results are seen as lower drivetrain losses), and uses variable gear ratio system (continuously varies the steering gear ratio).
The car seems to be geared really short (based on assumption that it uses similar gear ratios as base RSX but with a shorter final drive at 4.765:1 compared to 4.388:1 in the RSX). Engine has lower compression (9.8:1) just like I assumed earlier, and optimized for regular fuel.
Just got my C&D and it tested the new Civic Si. The numbers are disappointing for the most part. It did 0-60 in 8.0 seconds and topped out at 125mph. Please tell me how this is an improvement? The 92 Si did 0-60 in 7.5 seconds with only 125 horses and the 99-00 Si was capable of 7.1 sec. The standard tires are terrible all season touring tires (Michelin MXV4 in 195/60 VR-15)! Thats the same exact tire that was used on my mom's 92 Accord. It took a very long 204 feet to stop from 70mph and it posted the worst lane change manuever speed at 69.4 mph (GTI: 72.4, SVT: 74.6). This car is a poor excuse for a hot hatch. It did pull .84g's on the skidpad, which is pretty good, but still couldn't match the grip of the GTI and Focus SVT. They pulled .86 and .91g's respectively. The GTI went from 0-60 in 6.5 sec and the Focus 7.8 sec. GTI's top speed is 131 (governor limited) and the Focus went all the way to 135. The GTI stopped in 177 ft and the Focus 170 ft. Honda did a serious misstep with this car. Not only is it slower, but it also has less room front, rear, and in the trunk. It now is outclassed on all fronts. Its sad really, because I used to love the Civic SI hatch, but this one just doesn't stand out like it used to.
I don't dispute the numbers, but I'd encourage you to test drive the 3 cars mentioned. Seems premature to discount the Si before you drive it. The numbers only tell part of the story for any product. Good luck!
Civic Si is launched with a different purpose than SVT/GTI, although they may compete on the scene. I'm not surprised that it is slower to 60 mph, and Honda used a linear torque delivery, low compression engine, and coupled it to a short ratio gearbox (two shifts to 60 mph would explain it).
The car is equipped with a few things that will go unnoticed in such comparos, may be until you go out and check one out yourself. No other car in its class comes standard with electronic brake distribution, and there is only one other production car in the world that comes with variable gear steering system, so there are some unique features on the inside, as well as electric steering. The question would be, how to harness those strengths? Remember, the Si is no Type-R, but designed with aftermarket potential. Wait and see. The first thing I would do to the car is look for a supercharger, improve suspension and get some performance rubber, and there you go, perhaps a $25-26K hot hatch, but it could be worth it if you're really into it.
I can't believe that Honda (of all companies) would put out this Si that is getting stomped on by competitors (of whom there are a lot of, as of late)!
They practically invented this category, and have now handed it off to others.
I still dislike the taller & narrower profile of this Si/RSX platform that Honda is using. Seems like a big step away from "sporty".
I think if you go into the $25-$26K range, I'd go pick up a WRX hatchback. Or maybe a less frenzied Audi A4 Avant. I just can't see putting that much into a car (I know some will though) when you won't get any of it back in resale and all your work won't be warrantied like a stock WRX.
The RSX is taller (~2.5") and *wider* (~1") than the third gen Integra, and the new SI strongly resembles previous Civic hatches, like the 4th and 5th gen. You just haven't seen a Civic hatch in a while... or you're too used to slammed "tuner" cars.
Thanks for the ideas/prices. I've heard before about the great improvements in handling you get with the ITR rear sway and tire/wheel changes. What about shocks? (Koni Special adjustables?) Do they add a substantial amount of improvement in handling/ride for the $$? My car is still in warranty which is why I'm not into major upgrades. But I am interested in wheels, tires, brakes, shocks etc. which would enhance my daily driving experience.
lngtonge18: As far as the new Si's 0-60 times, I'm not surprised. I'll bet the Si has gotten much larger and heavier since 92. Even my 00 Si I bet does 0-60 times only in the mid to high 7's despite the published 7.2 sec (maybe on a sticky track with a cool breeze behind you). My questions are.. does the 02 Si use regular gas - does it really have more noticeable torque?
From what you said, I would also be very disappointed in the tire selection, but the choice must have been made for the masses.
interesting... though, I'm definitely not interested in "slammed" cars, these latest civics while sitting higher just appear to be narrower. thanks for the data points.
I still think it's too bad that Honda is moving more towards the mainstream with this Si... regardless, I don't understand how a new iteration would be introduced that's slower than it's predecessor and the competition. Granted, the reliability and resale of this car will exceed both the Focus and GTI but that seems to be it's only saving grace.
Perhaps if they bring over the CTR, as Motor Trend has alluded to in their latest edition....
Comments
For future reference, look for a direct link to the Honda Civic Owners Club in the additional Resources on the left side of the page. Happy Motoring!
Revka
Host
Hatchbacks / Station Wagons / Women's Auto Center Boards
Honda's assertion is that most consumers will swap out the tires and wheels right away, so why put anything better on.... what kind of logic is that??
[notice that Nissan, Mazda, and VW all offer better tire/wheels on their econo-sport offerings]
The more I think about it, the less I buy the "well they're going to change the rims anyway" argument.
Outside of their Type-Rs, Honda tends to skimp on both of these items. Don't they [Honda] know that other manufacturers are offering cars in this category??
If Honda had to keep the price of car down, they could have saved a bundle by not using unique steering setup for the Si (regular Civics use power steering pump, not electric steering and Si is the second production car in the world to use variable gear steering system) and go as far as making moon-roof standard. There are more ways to keep price down than size of wheel.
If I'm correct, the Si is using P205/50/R15 tire size, and that means overall diameter of the wheel (including the rubber) is only 23.07"! Wheel size affects overall gearing of the drivetrain. The smaller the wheel, the shorter the gearing gets. Compared to 25.31" wheels on RSX, and assuming that the Si uses the same gearbox as the base RSX, the Civic will have 10% shorter overall gearing. This will mean that the Si engine will rev higher and faster. It may not be cosmetically appealing, but it would multiply the torque better. It is one of those compromises, style or performance. BTW, the 2002 Civic Type-R wheel size comes to about 24.61" with its 17" rim and lower profile tire.
So, does that affect 0-60 time? If it affects gearing, it is going to affect all acceleration times. So, it may not be as much as getting away with for Honda, but about what others need to do to be competitive.
How bad is not having 17" wheels? If its made an option any serious buyer would always buy them.
IRS:
Does it mean that these cars cannot handle well? I don't think the handling differences are huge.
Don't forget that you can use the 15's as winter rims if you plus size in the aftermarket; it would be harder if a larger sized rim were standard.
I'm sure they will be available as option, if not as an upgrade. If I were to buy a car and wanted different wheels, I would prefer to get something after a good deal of research, not from the limited options that an automaker provides which are generally for cosmetic purpose only. From Honda, I would probably prefer to get the old ITR 15" wheels which are quite likely the lightest in business and perform exceptionally well with performance rubber. But then, it won't be 17".
IRS:
Does it mean that these cars cannot handle well? I don't think the handling differences are huge.
The differences may not be huge, but then, higher end cars don't come without IRS. Costs? Remember I pointed this out against your comment on cost cutting ideas, and this is definitely one of them, if only one of those hidden things.
Anyhow, this won't change anything.
So, what else are people going to cross-shop this with?
VW GTI/Focus SVT-- questionable reliability (though, I do like the GTI)
Sentra SE-R -- personally, I didn't like this car when I test drove it
Others??
Automobile mag just had a comparo w/ these vehicles, and liked the SVT the best then the GTI, and then the Si (followed by the SE-R and MP3)
But then, I would have to go out and compare these cars in person to make any kind of judgement. I still believe that Si would have more tuning potential than SVT with minimum effort, the Honda having a less stressed engine, and possibly a tranny and stock components that can take a lot more abuse.
Not trying to be jerk, just wonder the reasons why for your statement.
Also, there's info on the car at http://www.vtec.net
I love Hondas - I've had two hatchbacks and a CRX. I think I'll pass on this one, tho. It really does look like the Focus - which is fine if you're a Ford, but I'd expect more from Honda.(I'll probably go drive the thing, of course.)
Anyways, Japanese cars are so 90s. I like the Euro cars much better these days. :-)
*zooms off in new VW*
I was also wondering if Honda dealers are putting people on waiting lists for this car and if they are requiring deposits. If they do ask for non refundable deposits and I cannot test drive it I will probably go with another car even though I have test driven an RSX which should be close to it.
I did say I could be wrong.
Honda certainly does have a lot of worthy competition out there. I just don't happen to think that anything Korean is in that catagory.
However, time certainly changes everything and this could well change.
I know this and can only hope the management at Honda continues to build quality product that will keep them on top.
If this sounds like arrogance then I have been misunderstood.
http://www.vtec.net/news/items/959.html
Revka
Host
Hatchbacks / Station Wagons / Women's Auto Center Boards
1. Needs more body stiffness. This would improve the "solid" feel of the car and is what I believe causes the most creaks and squeaks. Not that the car is made of jello -- and it is way better then the 86 Accord hatchback I use to have.
2. Slow steering.
3. Needs more low end power! Notice most when starting from a dead stop going uphill.
4. Thin paint and sheet metal.
I think the alloy wheels that came with the car are fine, but the stock Michelin all season tires were crap - especially in the rain. When I replaced them with Toyo Proxes T1-S rubber (same stock size -- 199/55 R15), the car improved tremendously. These tires utilize 95% of my Si's capability. Also, I noticed that the new Si doesn't have wishbones all the way around. I don't care for mods, but I know that the wishbones provide a good combination of ride and handling. Is the setup on the new Si going to be better?
Yep it's so mediocre that it was near the top in sales last year. I guess all the people who bought it must not care about quality.
Wheels: 15x7 Kosei K1 Racing wheels (approx. 13 lbs--your stock Si wheels weigh something around 15-16 lbs) $139 each (tirerack.com)
Tires: Depends on what you need as far as treadwear and what weather you need to drive in. Kumho ECSTA are about $62 each and are a great tire for the money (with very good treadwear). I would then consider the Bridgestone RE730, higher grip $94 each or $79 each for 195/55/15. Above that, you are looking at about $120 per tire with the Bridgestone Potenza SO3 and Toyo T1-S.
Rear Sway: Mounting components from http://www.geocities.com/beaksproducts
and the bar and bushings from http://www.ahmotor.com/performancedivision/index.html
should be less than $200 total (I have this mounting kit and sway on my 98 Civic hatch)
Good luck with what you decide to do
Must be registered to view. It has the color, some specs and other details. One of the most interesting things is about the equipment level. I remember previous Si bashing because of absence of ABS (in USA). Now, Honda has not only added ABS, but EBD (Electronic Brake Distribution) is standard too.
The steering is electrically powered (not pump, I hope the results are seen as lower drivetrain losses), and uses variable gear ratio system (continuously varies the steering gear ratio).
The car seems to be geared really short (based on assumption that it uses similar gear ratios as base RSX but with a shorter final drive at 4.765:1 compared to 4.388:1 in the RSX). Engine has lower compression (9.8:1) just like I assumed earlier, and optimized for regular fuel.
I believe there are five exterior color choices.
The car is equipped with a few things that will go unnoticed in such comparos, may be until you go out and check one out yourself. No other car in its class comes standard with electronic brake distribution, and there is only one other production car in the world that comes with variable gear steering system, so there are some unique features on the inside, as well as electric steering. The question would be, how to harness those strengths? Remember, the Si is no Type-R, but designed with aftermarket potential. Wait and see. The first thing I would do to the car is look for a supercharger, improve suspension and get some performance rubber, and there you go, perhaps a $25-26K hot hatch, but it could be worth it if you're really into it.
They practically invented this category, and have now handed it off to others.
I still dislike the taller & narrower profile of this Si/RSX platform that Honda is using. Seems like a big step away from "sporty".
Just my two cents.
The RSX is taller (~2.5") and *wider* (~1") than the third gen Integra, and the new SI strongly resembles previous Civic hatches, like the 4th and 5th gen. You just haven't seen a Civic hatch in a while... or you're too used to slammed "tuner" cars.
lngtonge18:
As far as the new Si's 0-60 times, I'm not surprised. I'll bet the Si has gotten much larger and heavier since 92. Even my 00 Si I bet does 0-60 times only in the mid to high 7's despite the published 7.2 sec (maybe on a sticky track with a cool breeze behind you). My questions are.. does the 02 Si use regular gas - does it really have more noticeable torque?
From what you said, I would also be very disappointed in the tire selection, but the choice must have been made for the masses.
I still think it's too bad that Honda is moving more towards the mainstream with this Si... regardless, I don't understand how a new iteration would be introduced that's slower than it's predecessor and the competition. Granted, the reliability and resale of this car will exceed both the Focus and GTI but that seems to be it's only saving grace.
Perhaps if they bring over the CTR, as Motor Trend has alluded to in their latest edition....